An appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for constipation: a right attitude towards to guidelines

Hongliang Tian,Chao Ding,Jianfeng Gong,Xiaolong Ge,Lynne V. McFarland,Lili Gu,Qiyi Chen,Chunlian Ma,Weiming Zhu,Jieshou Li,Ning Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-016-0466-8

2016-01-01

BMC Gastroenterology

Abstract:Background Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are formally developed statements that assist users to provide proper health care for a kind of disease and play a significant contribution in healthcare system. This study report the methodological quality of CPGs on constipation. Methods The “Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation” (AGREEII) instrument was developed to determine the quality of CPGs. A comprehensive search was developed using five databases and three guideline websites until/up to December, 2015. Four independent authors evaluated the methodological issues of the CPGs by the AGREEII instrument. Results We identified 22 relevant guidelines on constipation from 1234 citations. The overall agreement among evaluators was 0.84 using the intra-class correlation coefficient. The mean AGREEII scores for the domains “scope and purpose” (51.77) and “rigor of development” (56.73) were moderate; afterward, three domains “stakeholder involvement” (32.23), “editorial independence” (29.59) and “applicability” (29.14) were low scores. The “clarity and presentation” (23.73) had the lowest scores. Conclusion Although existing constipation guidelines may accurately reflect current clinical practices, many guidelines’ methodological quality is low. Therefore, more emphasis and attentions should be taken to the development of high-quality guidelines.